Comparative Study of Electrical Stimulation of the Heart with VDD and DDD Pacemakers as to the Evolution to Atrial Fibrillation

Abstract Introduction: The pacemaker implantation VDD is considered simpler, faster, less expensive and causes fewer complications compared to DDD. However, the VDD pacemaker has not been widely used in many centers, perhaps for fear of dysfunction of the sinus node and the reduction of atrial sens...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Nelson Leonardo Kerdahi Leite de Campos, Rubens Ramos de Andrade, Marcello Laneza Fellicio, Antônio Sergio Martins, André Monti Garzesi, Leonardo Rufino Garcia, Tassya Bueno Takeda
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Sociedade Brasileira de Cirurgia Cardiovascular
Series:Brazilian Journal of Cardiovascular Surgery
Subjects:
Online Access:http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0102-76382017000500347&lng=en&tlng=en
id doaj-a07a9e8f9bcc4682b1978f2e656dcb58
record_format Article
spelling doaj-a07a9e8f9bcc4682b1978f2e656dcb582020-11-24T21:18:40ZengSociedade Brasileira de Cirurgia CardiovascularBrazilian Journal of Cardiovascular Surgery1678-974132534735310.21470/1678-9741-2017-0505S0102-76382017000500347Comparative Study of Electrical Stimulation of the Heart with VDD and DDD Pacemakers as to the Evolution to Atrial FibrillationNelson Leonardo Kerdahi Leite de CamposRubens Ramos de AndradeMarcello Laneza FellicioAntônio Sergio MartinsAndré Monti GarzesiLeonardo Rufino GarciaTassya Bueno TakedaAbstract Introduction: The pacemaker implantation VDD is considered simpler, faster, less expensive and causes fewer complications compared to DDD. However, the VDD pacemaker has not been widely used in many centers, perhaps for fear of dysfunction of the sinus node and the reduction of atrial sensitivity by the pacemaker during follow-up after implantation. Objective: To compare patients with DDD and VDD pacemakers regarding the evolution of chronic atrial fibrillation (AF) and length of stay outside this postoperative arrhythmia. Methods: It was included 158 patients with dual chamber pacemakers, 48 DDD and 110 VDD. Follow-up period: between January 1, 1999 and December 31, 2015. The mean follow-up of patients with DDD was 5.35 years and the VDD, 4.74 years. The percentage of each group (DDD and VDD) which evolved to AF during follow-up was assessed. Also, it was made an actuarial study with the respective curves indicating the time free from AF for each group. Patients were classified according to the diagnosis that led to pacemaker implantation and the degree of heart failure. Results: The percentage of patients who developed AF was higher in DDD group (10.42%) than in VDD group (6.36%), but without statistical significance. Patients with DDD and VDD remained free of AF for similar period. Conclusion: Considering the results, the VDD pacemaker continues to be a good option to the DDD for routine use in cases properly indicated.http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0102-76382017000500347&lng=en&tlng=enPacemaker, ArtificialAtrial FibrillationAtrioventricular Block
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Nelson Leonardo Kerdahi Leite de Campos
Rubens Ramos de Andrade
Marcello Laneza Fellicio
Antônio Sergio Martins
André Monti Garzesi
Leonardo Rufino Garcia
Tassya Bueno Takeda
spellingShingle Nelson Leonardo Kerdahi Leite de Campos
Rubens Ramos de Andrade
Marcello Laneza Fellicio
Antônio Sergio Martins
André Monti Garzesi
Leonardo Rufino Garcia
Tassya Bueno Takeda
Comparative Study of Electrical Stimulation of the Heart with VDD and DDD Pacemakers as to the Evolution to Atrial Fibrillation
Brazilian Journal of Cardiovascular Surgery
Pacemaker, Artificial
Atrial Fibrillation
Atrioventricular Block
author_facet Nelson Leonardo Kerdahi Leite de Campos
Rubens Ramos de Andrade
Marcello Laneza Fellicio
Antônio Sergio Martins
André Monti Garzesi
Leonardo Rufino Garcia
Tassya Bueno Takeda
author_sort Nelson Leonardo Kerdahi Leite de Campos
title Comparative Study of Electrical Stimulation of the Heart with VDD and DDD Pacemakers as to the Evolution to Atrial Fibrillation
title_short Comparative Study of Electrical Stimulation of the Heart with VDD and DDD Pacemakers as to the Evolution to Atrial Fibrillation
title_full Comparative Study of Electrical Stimulation of the Heart with VDD and DDD Pacemakers as to the Evolution to Atrial Fibrillation
title_fullStr Comparative Study of Electrical Stimulation of the Heart with VDD and DDD Pacemakers as to the Evolution to Atrial Fibrillation
title_full_unstemmed Comparative Study of Electrical Stimulation of the Heart with VDD and DDD Pacemakers as to the Evolution to Atrial Fibrillation
title_sort comparative study of electrical stimulation of the heart with vdd and ddd pacemakers as to the evolution to atrial fibrillation
publisher Sociedade Brasileira de Cirurgia Cardiovascular
series Brazilian Journal of Cardiovascular Surgery
issn 1678-9741
description Abstract Introduction: The pacemaker implantation VDD is considered simpler, faster, less expensive and causes fewer complications compared to DDD. However, the VDD pacemaker has not been widely used in many centers, perhaps for fear of dysfunction of the sinus node and the reduction of atrial sensitivity by the pacemaker during follow-up after implantation. Objective: To compare patients with DDD and VDD pacemakers regarding the evolution of chronic atrial fibrillation (AF) and length of stay outside this postoperative arrhythmia. Methods: It was included 158 patients with dual chamber pacemakers, 48 DDD and 110 VDD. Follow-up period: between January 1, 1999 and December 31, 2015. The mean follow-up of patients with DDD was 5.35 years and the VDD, 4.74 years. The percentage of each group (DDD and VDD) which evolved to AF during follow-up was assessed. Also, it was made an actuarial study with the respective curves indicating the time free from AF for each group. Patients were classified according to the diagnosis that led to pacemaker implantation and the degree of heart failure. Results: The percentage of patients who developed AF was higher in DDD group (10.42%) than in VDD group (6.36%), but without statistical significance. Patients with DDD and VDD remained free of AF for similar period. Conclusion: Considering the results, the VDD pacemaker continues to be a good option to the DDD for routine use in cases properly indicated.
topic Pacemaker, Artificial
Atrial Fibrillation
Atrioventricular Block
url http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0102-76382017000500347&lng=en&tlng=en
work_keys_str_mv AT nelsonleonardokerdahileitedecampos comparativestudyofelectricalstimulationoftheheartwithvddanddddpacemakersastotheevolutiontoatrialfibrillation
AT rubensramosdeandrade comparativestudyofelectricalstimulationoftheheartwithvddanddddpacemakersastotheevolutiontoatrialfibrillation
AT marcellolanezafellicio comparativestudyofelectricalstimulationoftheheartwithvddanddddpacemakersastotheevolutiontoatrialfibrillation
AT antoniosergiomartins comparativestudyofelectricalstimulationoftheheartwithvddanddddpacemakersastotheevolutiontoatrialfibrillation
AT andremontigarzesi comparativestudyofelectricalstimulationoftheheartwithvddanddddpacemakersastotheevolutiontoatrialfibrillation
AT leonardorufinogarcia comparativestudyofelectricalstimulationoftheheartwithvddanddddpacemakersastotheevolutiontoatrialfibrillation
AT tassyabuenotakeda comparativestudyofelectricalstimulationoftheheartwithvddanddddpacemakersastotheevolutiontoatrialfibrillation
_version_ 1726007953601855488